Boardroom Version of Misc Musings, Rants, Ravings, and Random Thoughts

A friend of mine is leaving his current job for greener pastures. Despite having been given the jobs of two other people as they left the company with no real increase in salary, and despite having a position with vital importance to the future of the company (This is not his opinion, they are totally screwed if they cannot transition someone into his role before he leaves), they were unwilling to give him real power to do his job, proper pay for his position or only one person's job to do. Now they are trying to do the same thing to other employees who are all saying "Not only no, but hell no!" They are interviewing someone but probably unwilling to pay close to market rate.

So my question is, why do companies do this to themselves? Where does the institutional blindness come from? How do you mistreat an employee in such a vital position so badly (to the point where other managers are writing scathing letters to upper management for letting it get to this point and absolutely none of them blame him for leaving) without realizing your error?

A friend of mine is leaving his current job for greener pastures. Despite having been given the jobs of two other people as they left the company with no real increase in salary, and despite having a position with vital importance to the future of the company (This is not his opinion, they are totally screwed if they cannot transition someone into his role before he leaves), they were unwilling to give him real power to do his job, proper pay for his position or only one person's job to do. Now they are trying to do the same thing to other employees who are all saying "Not only no, but hell no!" They are interviewing someone but probably unwilling to pay close to market rate.

So my question is, why do companies do this to themselves? Where does the institutional blindness come from? How do you mistreat an employee in such a vital position so badly (to the point where other managers are writing scathing letters to upper management for letting it get to this point and absolutely none of them blame him for leaving) without realizing your error?

I saw a pair of owners rn a $50 million in annual revenue corp into the ground. When they finally sold out, annual revenue was back at less than $2 million.

The stupidest thing they did was fire the finance guy who had a MBA and was super sharp and always told them wtf not to do to ruin the company.

They were also great at forcing turnover on their production staff, because it kept payroll low, while giving raises and parties to the sales people.

You can only piss on your bench techs before they stop caring. And then to replace them with McJob refugees is going to do wonders for your authorized OEM repair depot. They treated their internal IT staff that way too.

Sometimes, you realize that you are a pretty damn good worker and that really can contribute at times. Maybe, you realize that you are integral to your entire organization running smoothly and although you are scared shitless at times, that everyone depends upon you to make things run smoothly and that what you do really fucking matters to your job. Today, I realized the latter. And although I feel like I'm still the kid fresh out of college whom doesn't really get what's going on, the things that I'm doing now make me realize that that isn't the case and that fresh out of college kid is long gone by now.

"So what's the story with NTP?""What?""I mean, why isn't it enabled?""That's your department's problem.""Wait, I thought that was your department's problem.""No, that's all you guys. We don't have any control over that.""Well, WE don't have any control over that either. At least, I don't, and when I asked, they said it was you guys."

"So what's the story with NTP?""What?""I mean, why isn't it enabled?""That's your department's problem.""Wait, I thought that was your department's problem.""No, that's all you guys. We don't have any control over that.""Well, WE don't have any control over that either. At least, I don't, and when I asked, they said it was you guys."

This place gets "better" every day.

Ahhhhh, the joys of groups passing the buck. Sound slike management needs to sit down between the groups and get this hammered out and fixed. sadly if your stories are true then I doubt that will happen until management is turned over.

Holy shit, I thought I had ADHD. I had a meeting with a couple of people where I could barely follow along because they were jumping around so much. Somehow, I was able to get them to actually agree to the requirements for the changes that need to be made. It was a lot of me listening to them jump around like gerbils on caffeinated crack and then summarizing their 5 minutes of rambling into a single sentence.

This. This always seems to be my purpose on conference calls. Even the simple sentence, "So, what are we agreeing to here?" is rarely uttered by the person who organized the call, and I refuse to acknowledge that my time has been *totally* wasted.

Holy shit, I thought I had ADHD. I had a meeting with a couple of people where I could barely follow along because they were jumping around so much. Somehow, I was able to get them to actually agree to the requirements for the changes that need to be made. It was a lot of me listening to them jump around like gerbils on caffeinated crack and then summarizing their 5 minutes of rambling into a single sentence.

It's been my experience that, increasingly, most people have less and less of an idea how to not only create an agenda for a meeting they call, but also how to stick to the salient points.

"So what's the story with NTP?""What?""I mean, why isn't it enabled?""That's your department's problem.""Wait, I thought that was your department's problem.""No, that's all you guys. We don't have any control over that.""Well, WE don't have any control over that either. At least, I don't, and when I asked, they said it was you guys."

This place gets "better" every day.

"Since we're all in this together, it's all of our problem. How about we stop bouncing the ball and come up with a solution together and look like rock stars?"

A friend of mine is leaving his current job for greener pastures. Despite having been given the jobs of two other people as they left the company with no real increase in salary, and despite having a position with vital importance to the future of the company (This is not his opinion, they are totally screwed if they cannot transition someone into his role before he leaves), they were unwilling to give him real power to do his job, proper pay for his position or only one person's job to do. Now they are trying to do the same thing to other employees who are all saying "Not only no, but hell no!" They are interviewing someone but probably unwilling to pay close to market rate.

So my question is, why do companies do this to themselves? Where does the institutional blindness come from? How do you mistreat an employee in such a vital position so badly (to the point where other managers are writing scathing letters to upper management for letting it get to this point and absolutely none of them blame him for leaving) without realizing your error?

I saw a pair of owners rn a $50 million in annual revenue corp into the ground. When they finally sold out, annual revenue was back at less than $2 million.

The stupidest thing they did was fire the finance guy who had a MBA and was super sharp and always told them wtf not to do to ruin the company.

They were also great at forcing turnover on their production staff, because it kept payroll low, while giving raises and parties to the sales people.

You can only piss on your bench techs before they stop caring. And then to replace them with McJob refugees is going to do wonders for your authorized OEM repair depot. They treated their internal IT staff that way too.

Hilarious.

I think I've brought this story up before, but I worked for a company that was doing very well until the owner realized it was doing very well... at which point he started spending all of the company's money.

The worst part, personally, is that I saw it all coming and brought the problems to the table and detailed several solutions. I was laid off a very short while later (like a week) and the company was then driven into the ground over the next few months. Those people I had come to call colleagues and even friends were all fucked over by a person who had absolutely no place at the helm of a business.

On the other hand, they're now doing several things I told them they should have been doing and even though they're down to about 1/10th the size the few remaining people should be OK for a while longer until either the place picks up again or it just closes down.

So my question is, why do companies do this to themselves? Where does the institutional blindness come from? How do you mistreat an employee in such a vital position so badly (to the point where other managers are writing scathing letters to upper management for letting it get to this point and absolutely none of them blame him for leaving) without realizing your error?

Wow, this is so up my alley. I have studied this for a long time, and there are thousands of books on the subject. Sadly, there is no easy, "write one, read many" answer. Each situation is an individual, but here's a few thing I have seen from various companies that are universal.

Sometimes people made bad decisions about employees or management in what I like to call "interpersonal cruft." After a while, people get sick of one another, and unlike a marriage, they don't feel invested enough to work it through (although, the same could be said about a lot of divorces). Sometimes it's gradual, sometimes just one hidden thing ticks the wrong person off. You may be buddies with your coworker for years, and then suddenly, you say something or do something that seems harmless, but it reminds him of his overbearing mom, and a switch goes off. Suddenly, he sees everything you do framed that way. He relives his whole rebellious childhood through you. And no one ever knows the real reason behind the sudden angst. Or it could be accumulated things where someone sees you as holding them back because they have to blame somebody. "It all seems to clear now..." even though nothing changed.

I blame seminars, books, and "new tools" on a lot of bad decisions. While there are many good things of references out there, the vast majority are shit. They are shit because they make huge assumptions on theoretical situations than reality. Customers and employees are not a commodity, for instance. While general rules of thumb apply (be polite, pay them well, don't have sex with them, etc) some books just... they read like someone who has never faced an angry customer, difficult sell, or employee who has bad dental work and needs some time off.

I believe a lot in the Peter Principle. Many people are promoted to the highest they can achieve until they stop achieving. After a few years, the top management becomes filled with dead, floating fish amid a layer of scum. Incompetent, overwhelmed, and unsupported, it blocks sunlight to the lower layers and you start seeing a lot of bad decisions, which then turn to books like above, which make it worse, etc... You need churn. You need vitality. And that's not so easy. You also need a frank reality check which is really, really hard to get when you're in the middle of it. Because it can sting. Hard. And when people get used to higher salaries and nice lifestyles, they don't want to give that up. They play the system instead of doing their job. Suddenly, it's all about politics inside the company, and the company goals lose focus. One of the biggest reasons I see in the IT field are people promoted "because they did a good job" and not because they are management material. Programmers, who are logical and practical, can sometimes make the worst managers because people are not logical or practical. "But I assigned them all bathroom breaks in order by weight, how come they refuse to stick to this?? I bet it's why our code base is bloated, they are bloated!" [that never happened, I exaggerated for humor and to make a point]

"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - Agent Kay, Men in Black

This last point happens when upper management sees things are going bad. I could go into dozens of stories where managers, seeing the writing on the wall, do not jump ship but try and become king of "the devil you know" and start backstabbing, manipulating, and hell with company focus and goals, it's all about them! They got a third kid, a housebound wife who runs expensive charity balls, a mistress, a boat, and a nice house in Martha's Vineyard. Daddy says they are a winner, and if daddy got a phone call on the golf course that his son lost his job at I.M. Big Financial as senior executive VP, he couldn't bear the disappointment. And all it takes is a few of those people, and the decent, company-focused managers get torn apart in politics they may barely understand.

When I worked at AOL, we were growing so fast in the 1990s, just when IBM laid off a shit ton of their useless, dead-weight middle management. That vacuum sucked them right into our ranks. Some of these guys were in their late 40s and 50s, and when they started at IBM in the 1970s and 80s, they were told it was their job for life. It was supposed to be secure. And IBM cut a lot of them off after 20-30 years, realizing a majority of these people were just costing them money without really providing value. So they drifted into AOL, and already burned once, they wedged themselves into cracks like bloated ticks. Because they were mad, hurt, and would be DAMNED if they ever trusted a company again. And frankly, AOL kept them for a while because they needed the warm bodies that could at least section off teams into manageable sizes. Those people brought in their dead-weight buddies. Soon, AOL middle management was like a network of pirates who had a tenuous agreement to help one another to profit overall, but that fell apart pretty quickly. IBM got rid of them for good reasons. Yes, some of those managers were actually decent. Those were the ones who knew about the others early on. They cashed in their stock and got the hell out. Even Steve Case eventually left. Which left a higher density of bad managers.

Nowadays, moving around from company to company isn't seen as a bad thing anymore, which used to filter out people like this. "Bob, says here you worked for these companies for only 4-5 years at a time... why are you a quitter? Why should we be loyal to you?" Now? "Bob worked at these great companies! Hire him!" Then 4 years later, a golden parachute lets him leave before Earnst and Young file the results of their investigative report. At his new company, "Oh, that scandal happened after I left..."

"Since we're all in this together, it's all of our problem. How about we stop bouncing the ball and come up with a solution together and look like rock stars?"

"The people who actually have root on the boxes set up NTP when they first install the servers and you and I go back to doing what we're paid to do." Unfortunately, I get told I'm not a team player when I say that.

"So what's the story with NTP?""What?""I mean, why isn't it enabled?""That's your department's problem.""Wait, I thought that was your department's problem.""No, that's all you guys. We don't have any control over that.""Well, WE don't have any control over that either. At least, I don't, and when I asked, they said it was you guys."

This place gets "better" every day.

"Since we're all in this together, it's all of our problem. How about we stop bouncing the ball and come up with a solution together and look like rock stars?"

We already had that conversation. They don't have the permissions, I don't have the permissions, my boss has the permissions. And she's been aware of the problem for over a year, and won't do anything about it.

Thanks for the reply Punk, I appreciate and definitely can see the reality behind your response. Makes me think even more that Valve might be on to something. If no one has an "upper management" position, and the entire company is ranked by the amount they contribute (not by division or hierarchical level), some of these things are harder to have happen. Of course I still don't know how you make that kind of style work in an external contracts company. How many times have you been at a company and realized that one or two people are effectively the glue for the whole company, but you know for a fact that they are not being paid like it.

However, in this case, he literally is in a position that can affect their ability to get future contracts. They literally cannot have a gap in coverage at this position because it is HIS name on the documents that give the company the right to operate. To the point where I suggested to him that they might need to keep him on the payroll as an employee for a bit of time after he has already left in order to make the transition. He literally could be paid his current salary to do no work for them except to allow continuity in transfer to his eventual successor and that would be vastly preferable to them having to start over from the beginning on the process of getting license to operate as they currently do. (This is an information security position as it relates to the DoD).

"So what's the story with NTP?""What?""I mean, why isn't it enabled?""That's your department's problem.""Wait, I thought that was your department's problem.""No, that's all you guys. We don't have any control over that.""Well, WE don't have any control over that either. At least, I don't, and when I asked, they said it was you guys."

This place gets "better" every day.

"Since we're all in this together, it's all of our problem. How about we stop bouncing the ball and come up with a solution together and look like rock stars?"

We already had that conversation. They don't have the permissions, I don't have the permissions, my boss has the permissions. And she's been aware of the problem for over a year, and won't do anything about it.

Nowadays, moving around from company to company isn't seen as a bad thing anymore, which used to filter out people like this. "Bob, says here you worked for these companies for only 4-5 years at a time... why are you a quitter? Why should we be loyal to you?" Now? "Bob worked at these great companies! Hire him!" Then 4 years later, a golden parachute lets him leave before Earnst and Young file the results of their investigative report. At his new company, "Oh, that scandal happened after I left..."

This is a vicious circle though. The reason people move from company to company is because of the bad politics in upper management. You say the good ones are the ones that left AOL early, but obviously that doesn't mean they should be filtered out...

Nowadays, moving around from company to company isn't seen as a bad thing anymore, which used to filter out people like this. "Bob, says here you worked for these companies for only 4-5 years at a time... why are you a quitter? Why should we be loyal to you?" Now? "Bob worked at these great companies! Hire him!" Then 4 years later, a golden parachute lets him leave before Earnst and Young file the results of their investigative report. At his new company, "Oh, that scandal happened after I left..."

This is a vicious circle though. The reason people move from company to company is because of the bad politics in upper management. You say the good ones are the ones that left AOL early, but obviously that doesn't mean they should be filtered out...

I think he is advocating being careful about hiring just because you have a lot of openings and someone looks good on paper. But yes, it is a vicious circle. I think also it is much easier to become an entrenched manager than it is in other non-management roles and it IS more important to regularly prune management ranks, but that isn't done.

At my last job, after a long search, we hired a new Software Manager (my department), with buy in from the developers (he seemed like he would work out well). He was difficult to deal with. A simple status report "This is taking longer than expected because of problem X but I'm pretty sure I can solve it in another day by doing Y" would lead to him trying to solve the problem in the middle of a meeting (even though you had already expressed a likely solution that you were pursuing). He regularly fell asleep in meetings (I think he might have been narcoleptic because he got really pissed at upper management when they called him on it and said they weren't allowed to) including ones he called. He carried a lot of baggage from previous projects "Never have more than 4 threads! It is impossible to make a program work reliably with more. Why are there 17 threads in this application? It can never work!" (nevermind that it had been working like this for years and only 3 threads were active, the rest idled at 0% CPU unless a task was dispatched to them and were all correctly mutexed etc). It all came to a head the Sunday night I was called in (after having been on the road all week) to debug a problem for a data collection and after adding code to NFS mount the new NAS added to our system we started seeing problems. I immediately backed out the change and the problem persisted. He came in (while his boss was there) and yelled "I want to know what you did to the system with your NFS mount!". I protested that I had already backed that change out and that the problem had just coincidentally occurred at the same time as the change. He was not mollified. I was the next day, when I came in and found out he had been let go that morning after less than 6 months. Even so, he managed to run 3 contracts out of money and morale into the ground for the Software division before they canned him.

Getting very discouraged with my job search as of late. Trying to relocate to the west coast near family, 100% willing and able to finance the relocation myself and willing to start with 4 weeks notice, yet not getting any callbacks. I've gotten a small number of phone interviews, they seem to go well and then the hiring managers fall off the face of the earth.

I really don't want to pack up and leave without having some income stream, and moving in with the family temporarily just isn't an option.

Getting very discouraged with my job search as of late. Trying to relocate to the west coast near family, 100% willing and able to finance the relocation myself and willing to start with 4 weeks notice, yet not getting any callbacks. I've gotten a small number of phone interviews, they seem to go well and then the hiring managers fall off the face of the earth.

I really don't want to pack up and leave without having some income stream, and moving in with the family temporarily just isn't an option.

Wow, it's me from a similar universe!

What got me a few more call backs was putting my mother-in-law's address down as my address.

What usually happens is I get calls or call-backs and they ask are you still in X (either San Diego or DC). And I always answer I'm in DC temporarily until I can find a position back in SD, where my family is. I also explain that I'm either willing to fund myself, or just tell them that most of my stuff is out there. I also explain that I'm willing to fly out for an interview, but would be perfectly happy doing the face to face over Skype.

Haven't been hired yet, but have had a lot more calls since I switched the addresses.

Haven't been hired yet, but have had a lot more calls since I switched the addresses.

Have you received any bad vibes from managers once they learn that you've 'lied' on your application about your address? It would be hard for me to say I'm temporarily in NY since all of my work and education history is from here. I'm definitely willing to try it but don't want to cause a negative impression and kill whatever chance I might have.

Nowadays, moving around from company to company isn't seen as a bad thing anymore, which used to filter out people like this. "Bob, says here you worked for these companies for only 4-5 years at a time... why are you a quitter? Why should we be loyal to you?" Now? "Bob worked at these great companies! Hire him!" Then 4 years later, a golden parachute lets him leave before Earnst and Young file the results of their investigative report. At his new company, "Oh, that scandal happened after I left..."

This is a vicious circle though. The reason people move from company to company is because of the bad politics in upper management. You say the good ones are the ones that left AOL early, but obviously that doesn't mean they should be filtered out...

That is my point, actually. You can't filter out people based on length, but it used to be a rule of thumb in the 80s and earlier. In a previous era where people had better long term responsibility, this would have been a warning flag but now... it's meaningless.

I wish there was a good answer for this. I hate to sound all old-man-get-off-my-lawn about this, but I think a big part is so many people don't have long term responsibility or honor. I can't tell you how many, I can't read minds, but I think work ethic is down a lot since the 1980s. The "me" decade really seemed to bring out the worst in people. I have theories as to why, but all they are is theories.

One of the ideas I always wondered about was how Ben and Jerry's (the ice cream company) was in the beginning. They had a rule that the top official in the chain, the CEO, could not make more than seven times the amount of the lowest paid person. With Ben Cohen's resignation as chief executive officer in 1995 that ended. They said it was when the CEO resigned, and the BoD had to make a more lucrative offer to get a new one. So why couldn't they up the salaries of the lowest paid employee to compensate? Back then, they made $8/hr, but I suppose if they made $20/hr, "that would be insane." I don't know if that's what they thought, but that's what comes across.

The CEO to employee salary is just astronomically ludicrous. In some large companies, there are contracts that new CTO Bob gets paid X amount, with Y% profit sharing, but if they terminate the contract, he gets a buyout of Z million aka "the golden parachute." Where's the incentive to work, there? Positions of power attract those who desire it most, and often that person does not have ANYONE else's interest at heart other than their own. So what's to stop a slick salesguy who slides in, dazzles a few people, does his job terribly, forcing them to get rid of him, and he leaves with Z million? If the guy has any sense of shame or honor, he'd do his damndest to make good. But... look at some of the BP execs? What ever happened to Tony Hayward after the disastrous Gulf Oil spill? He's retired from BP (BP never fired him, they reassigned him to Russia) and is part of a joint venture shell corporation (not "Shell" the company, but a company that moves assets without actually having any assets or their own, usually used as a tax dodge or other obfuscations within corporation trading) and still serves on the board of BP's Russian joint venture, TNK-BP International Ltd.* So what's there for a moral-less cut-throat to lose? Hell, even in American business, this stuff is worshiped. TO BILL BRASKY!

The separation of haves and have-nots is getting worse every decade for the last few. I'm not saying the 1950s and 60s were beer and skittles, but at least they weren't as brash about it. Now it seems you could rape your secretary, brag about it, brag about snorting coke off a stripper's tits in any newspaper, go to jail for it, get off quietly with some good lawyers, and be right back in the fray. "Hell, I like this guy! He's got the guts to live life strong!" Ugh.

But the real crime, IMHO? Is the other people who sit and do nothing. A majority of the people in any company are decent people, but they are convinced not to make career-ending waves. "I'd turn Bob in for stealing sacks of cash from the company safe for hookers and blow, but then I am not being a team player..." Ugh. Ugh ugh ugh. And they are right, too. I have seen good people be fired for standing up for themselves. One of my best friends got fired because he refused to illegally work in Brazil without a visa. And when he manager pressured him to claim "tell that it's just a vacation," my friend contacted corporate legal who said, "no, that is a BAD thing." His manager got a slap on the wrist, and come layoff time... "Oh, sorry.. you position has been eliminated." GRRRR! That pissed me off so much!

Haven't been hired yet, but have had a lot more calls since I switched the addresses.

Have you received any bad vibes from managers once they learn that you've 'lied' on your application about your address? It would be hard for me to say I'm temporarily in NY since all of my work and education history is from here. I'm definitely willing to try it but don't want to cause a negative impression and kill whatever chance I might have.

Regardless, thanks for the tip.

No, because I technically haven't lied. I've lived there before, albeit very shortly. And I'm not lying when I say I'm only here temporarily until I can move back with family. My wife recently went back to SD to finish up school, living at the address that I used. For you, it might not be so truthful, so use at your own peril.

But if you tell them that you're only where you are for another few weeks to months (basically until you get that job) then you're not being untruthful.

For those following my story a few pages back, the axe has dropped: I've been fired from my job.

I'm working on refreshing my resume, which I'll post here for feedback.

I'm also going to have to figure out whether I'll be eligible for unemployment, but it doesn't look good based on my reading of the PA UC guidelines. They seem to have phrased my discharge letter to make my "unsatisfactory work performance" to sound like "willful misconduct", which revokes eligibility. I feel that they set me up for failure with my PIP, and then loaded me up with additional work which they refused to recognize contributed to missing deadlines.

There is also the issue of whether I'll get unpaid vacation paid out. From what I can find Pennsylvania law doesn't require it, but employers are required to follow their own written policies. Unfortunately I didn't think to snag a copy of the employee handbook from my desk before being escorted out of the building, so I have no idea what their policy is. I had three weeks of unused vacation.

Then there is the thorny issue of how I'll represent this in future interviews. I know it's bad form to speak negatively of a former employer in an interview, but on the other hand I'll need some explanation for events that won't ruin my chances for future employment.

Getting very discouraged with my job search as of late. Trying to relocate to the west coast near family, 100% willing and able to finance the relocation myself and willing to start with 4 weeks notice, yet not getting any callbacks. I've gotten a small number of phone interviews, they seem to go well and then the hiring managers fall off the face of the earth.

I really don't want to pack up and leave without having some income stream, and moving in with the family temporarily just isn't an option.

Get a local number (Google Voice) and leave your address off your resume.

Haven't been hired yet, but have had a lot more calls since I switched the addresses.

Have you received any bad vibes from managers once they learn that you've 'lied' on your application about your address? It would be hard for me to say I'm temporarily in NY since all of my work and education history is from here. I'm definitely willing to try it but don't want to cause a negative impression and kill whatever chance I might have.

Regardless, thanks for the tip.

No, because I technically haven't lied. I've lived there before, albeit very shortly. And I'm not lying when I say I'm only here temporarily until I can move back with family. My wife recently went back to SD to finish up school, living at the address that I used. For you, it might not be so truthful, so use at your own peril.

But if you tell them that you're only where you are for another few weeks to months (basically until you get that job) then you're not being untruthful.

Think of it as Obi Wan logic.

I would just lie. *shrug*

It's not really the hiring manager's concern where I live. I'm a big boy; I can handle getting to and from job interviews, etc.

Take solace in the fact that you are not the first, nor will you be the last, to be fired for something not your fault. You can land on your feet. Get shit-faced and otherwise do what you have to do for the next couple of days, figure out what you're going to say, get some references you can trust, and start looking for the next job.

I'm also going to have to figure out whether I'll be eligible for unemployment, but it doesn't look good based on my reading of the PA UC guidelines. They seem to have phrased my discharge letter to make my "unsatisfactory work performance" to sound like "willful misconduct", which revokes eligibility. I feel that they set me up for failure with my PIP, and then loaded me up with additional work which they refused to recognize contributed to missing deadlines.

Let the UI people figure that out after you file your claim. That is their job, and some of that stuff can be subjective which they will decide. You have nothing to lose by filing.

I'm also going to have to figure out whether I'll be eligible for unemployment, but it doesn't look good based on my reading of the PA UC guidelines. They seem to have phrased my discharge letter to make my "unsatisfactory work performance" to sound like "willful misconduct", which revokes eligibility. I feel that they set me up for failure with my PIP, and then loaded me up with additional work which they refused to recognize contributed to missing deadlines.

Let the UI people figure that out after you file your claim. That is their job, and some of that stuff can be subjective which they will decide. You have nothing to lose by filing.

I second this. Many, many years ago, I had a deputy review my case when my unemployment was denied because my former company lied like crazy, and I got to hear it all over speakerphone. They claimed I was still employed by them, but they didn't have work for me. They were told, "in the state of Virginia, 'not having work' for more than 30 days is being unemployed." So then they said I was contracted. "Not according to his last paycheck stub, which he submitted and I have right in front of me," then a muffled voice shouted, "Lynn, stop speaking to them. I don't know, tell them anything, just get them off the phone!" The deputy smiled and said she'd take care of the rest. I got unemployment.

If a company is that vindictive to counter your claim, you can always sue, and they know that. Generally, it's far easier to take the hit on unemployment insurance they have already been paying for than to deal with you and your legal team. Unless they are morons, and they might be.

Absolutely file for UI. Separation cases are often subjective. Hopefully you have some documentation regarding your PIP, they'll want that, and they'll likely request pertinent information out of your employee handbook from the employer if you don't have a copy. You may be thinking that it's hard to prove that you were set up for failure, but if they fired you, it's also important for them to prove that you committed misconduct. Phraseology on termination paperwork isn't exactly compelling evidence - what actually happened is the important part.

This is from my experience adjudicating cases in NY, the above may not apply to your state.

Then there is the thorny issue of how I'll represent this in future interviews. I know it's bad form to speak negatively of a former employer in an interview, but on the other hand I'll need some explanation for events that won't ruin my chances for future employment.

...

Back in 2009 I was let go from my job of almost 10 years. My department got a new directory, changed roles around, they laid off my manager, then gave me outsourced peers to train. Once my peers were trained, my new manager told me my current work performance was extremely lacking and I had to complete a large project in one month. Two weeks in my manager told me in private, "don't even try, you won't make it" and said I should start looking for a job. I honestly felt it they were setting me up to fail, even getting the project past the CM approval process sometimes takes weeks.

As hard as it was, this was the best thing to my career. My role at the company was extremely unsatisfying, but I stayed there since I was too scared to take a chance and leave. Now my knowledge has grown so many times more from new work experience and encouragement from new management.

How I presented this to future employers was as honestly as possible. I told them my department was outsourced and I was migrated into senior department with no title or pay increase. The manager said I didn't match the requirements and was let go.

Often times, after this they will ask more details about how I felt about the job but I tell them an neutral as possible, that it was an financial decision to outsource my whole department. Now it's been a few years since this happened so it comes up much less than before during interviews, so it's easier to deal with. As mentioned, it's not the first time this has happened before and many people know about it.

It's a hard time, especially getting that first job from lay off, but things will get better.

I think you can be honest while not being angry and bitter in interviews (please feel free to be a bit angry and bitter in real life.)

Something along the lines of - "I'm still not sure entirely what the motivation was, but I was put in PIP due to a change in how reviews were handled after they had already been written by my departing manager. While my new manager was aware of the issue and helped make sure I emerged from my PIP just fine, when I screwed up later on, the PIP which had been completed was held against me and I am pretty sure someone decided I was trouble and they didn't want me there anymore. To be honest I saw this coming for at least a month. While I admit that I did make a mistake (fill in details as desired), I don't believe that my conduct warranted dismissal and am disappointed it came to that."

I submitted my claim for PA UC online, so I guess I'll just have to wait and see how they respond. I admit to not being overly optimistic, but life is going to be very difficult to me without some sort of safety net. My emergency fund wasn't quite where I wanted it to be, without additional funds it will probably be exhausted inside of three months.

...

Part of the problem I always seem to run into when researching jobs is figuring out exactly what it is I do.

In the organizations I've been in a relatively small number of the IT personnel are in the "straight technical" fields: By which I means DBAs, Network Analysts, Windows/Unix Server Admins, Desktop Hardware Support, etcetera. Even straight-up developers (coders) have been a minority in the IT organizations I've been in. Yet all of the job listings I see seem to be for these types.

The vast majority of the headcount has always been application folks. Support, administration, integration, and so forth. You need to be a bit of a jack of all trades, to know enough to work with the folks in the other areas. I do some development (C#, Perl, PowerShell, minimal Java and PHP) for integrations and administration scripts/processes, but I don't really consider myself a developer. I can make my way through a windows or linux server environment, but I'm not windows/linux sysadmin either. I know enough about network technologies to work with the networking folks when problems arise (though they're the hardest to convince that there is a problem on their end), but I'm not a network admin and I don't have any of the industry certs that those folks have.

You get the idea. I just don't understand how jobs like mine can appear to be the vast majority of people in the organizations I've been in, yet the job descriptions I see out there don't reflect that.

Also it doesn't help that I've supported a ton of very specific vendor applications which provide me with approximately zero useful experience outside of a single company. I'm good at picking up new things, but that's harder to represent on a resume. At least the people who work with the big-time third party apps (PeopleSoft, SAP, etcetera) have something to put on their resumes. No one has ever heard of any of the applications I've supported.

Anyway...there is more to being a good IT worker than having a specific skillset. Just as important are communication skills, the ability to work in highly demanding environments, being flexible, having a fierce curiosity for new technology, thinking 'different' to solve problems, analytical skills, methodical approaches to troubleshooting, etc.

Specific skills can be taught/learned, but a company generally won't waste money doing that to someone who hasn't already demonstrated most/all of the aforementioned personality traits.

Being a good manager is hard. Why do you think corporate america suffers with so many inane, nonsensical, counterproductive policies and procedures? Cause they don;t know any better, so they do what everyone else does. And you get management philosophies designed for factories and railroads being shoved onto IT and other knowledge workers.

Remember, polices are the antithesis of good management. They replace critical thinking and reason with arbitrary rules and measures. Beware companies that are run via strict policy. Or at least be aware and OK with what you are getting into.

Quote:

For those following my story a few pages back, the axe has dropped: I've been fired from my job.

What happened?

Quote:

You get the idea. I just don't understand how jobs like mine can appear to be the vast majority of people in the organizations I've been in, yet the job descriptions I see out there don't reflect that.

Also it doesn't help that I've supported a ton of very specific vendor applications which provide me with approximately zero useful experience outside of a single company. I'm good at picking up new things, but that's harder to represent on a resume. At least the people who work with the big-time third party apps (PeopleSoft, SAP, etcetera) have something to put on their resumes. No one has ever heard of any of the applications I've supported.

Not to sound like a downer, but this is a lot of BS.

The job you describes is "IT Analyst/IT support" or something like that. A general IT monkey.

And the fact no one knows the apps you support has basically fuck all to do with your marketability.

What have YOU done to define your role? In the jobs you had, have you focused as much as you can on the development part because you want to be a developer? Have you eschewed development and focused on requirements gathering and business process modelling and the like so you can become a business analyst? Have you taken the lead on projects and organized team members to increase productivity to try and push into IT management?

No one is going to define your career for you. NO ONE. If you think you can flounder along in job after job and "fall into" a defined category, you're going to end up an underpaid, overworked 50 year old IT monkey who eventually gets laid off and replaced with an intern.

Decide WHAT you want to do, HOW you can do it, and then DO IT. You don't pick a major after you graduate college, you don;t decide what kind of car you want after you buy it, you don't decide what you want to eat after you finish dinner. Decide what you want, then make it happen. If you don't, well, you run the risk of being exactly where you are now.

SO going forward, I would remedy that. Pick a career path in IT you WANT to get into, optimize your resume to focus on what you have done that is relevant to that role, buy books/do research/find a mentor that can help you grow your skills in the area, and apply for jobs with that title. It takes work. It certainly isn't going to fall in your lap by happenstance.

Quote:

Then there is the thorny issue of how I'll represent this in future interviews.

"I wasn't a good fit for the position or the company" is the safe stock answer to go with. Don't lie and make up a reason though.

Quote:

Get a local number (Google Voice) and leave your address off your resume.

Don't do this. Lying through omission is still lying. Hiring managers aren't stupid robots you can "out clever". If you lie on an application you will most likely get caught, and your resume tossed in the garbage (and depending on the company blacklisted by HR)

That, and the world is smaller than you think. That one hiring manager you piss off by lying/misrepresenting yourself very well might be golf buddies with the next hiring manager you are going to sit in front of.

Get a local number (Google Voice) and leave your address off your resume.

Don't do this. Lying through omission is still lying. Hiring managers aren't stupid robots you can "out clever".

OK, so what would you suggest? (Seriously, I'd like to know)

For looking for an out of state job? Include on the cover letter that you are willing to relocate and that relocation assistance is not required. Tell the truth (assuming that is the truth)

This is what I did when I moved from Cincinnati to Vermont. I had 3 companies interview over the phone in a month, 1 went to a second Skype interview but didn't pan out out. The third flew me p and offere me a job on rh spot